Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	bishop_n	church_n	succession_n	2,569	5	10.4652	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48960	Analogia honorum, or, A treatise of honour and nobility, according to the laws and customes of England collected out of the most authentick authors, both ancient and modern : in two parts : the first containing honour military, and relateth to war, the second, honour civil, and relateth	Logan, John, 17th cent.; Blome, Richard, d. 1705.	1677 (1677)	Wing L2834; ESTC R17555	244,594	208

of the most noble order of the Garter c ● The Right Reverend Father in God Henry Compton by Divine permission Lord Bishop of London Deane of his matys Chappel and one of the Lords of his most honble privy Councell brother to the Rt. honble Iames Earle of Northampton The Right Reverend Father in God Nathaniel Crew by divine permission Lord Bishop of Durham Clerk of the Closet● to his Maty and one of the Lords of his most honble privy Councell son to the Rt. honble Iohn Ld. Crew Baron of Steane The Right Reverend Father in God Iohn Pearson by Divine permission Lord Bishop of Chester The Right Reverend Father in God Peter Gunning by Divine permission Lord Bishop of Ely OF THE Lords Spiritual CHAP. VIII ACCORDING to the Laws and Customes of this Realm many are the Ecclesiastical Dignities and Priviledges belonging to the Bishops and Clergymen who in all succeeding Ages have been reverenced with the greatest observance imaginable as being acknowleded by all good Christians to be those Messengers sent and particularly appointed by God to take care of our Souls The Subjects of England are either Clergy or Laymen both which are subdivided into Nobility and Commons Thus we find in our Parliament the Lords Spiritual and Temporal make the Upper House the Commons Spiritual viz. the Clergy elected to sit in Convocation who once had place and suffrage in the Lower House of Parliament and the Commons Temporal viz. the Knights and Burgesses make the Commons Most evident it is by the Consent of all the Councils Fathers Histories and Universal Tradition That for the first Fifteen hundred years continuance of Christianity there is no Example to be found of any Church governed by any Authority Ecclesiastick but that of Episcopacy they were ordained by the Apostles themselves to be their Successors in Christ's Church to have a vigilant eye over the Pastors and Teachers under them as to their Lives and Doctrine for the preservation of Truth and Peace the prevention of Scandal suppression of Heresie and Schism and to have a care of their Flock to bring them to Salvation 'T is not therefore without reason that in all times they have been the first of the two Divisions of the people the Clergy and Laity and as Spiritual Barons take place of Temporal they take their name from the Saxon word Biscoep a Super-intendent or Overseer They are three ways Barons of the Realm viz. by Writ Patent and Consecration They precede all under the Degree of Viscounts and are always placed upon the King 's right hand in the Parliament House They have the Title of Lords and Right Reverend Fathers in God And their Sees by the piety of former times are endowed with fair Revenues for the due administration of what belongs to their places And to keep them from corrupt and sinister affections the King 's most Noble Progenitors and the Ancestors of the Nobility and Gentry have sufficiently endowed the Church with Honour and Possessions Many Priviledges and Immunities were likewise granted to them and the Clergy by the Saxon and Danish Kings as coyning of Money conferring the Order of Knighthood c. which hath been long since appropriate to the Crown Thus Laufranck Archbishop of Canterbury made William the Second Knight in the life time of his Father Of Priviledges remaining some belong to to the Archbishops some to the Bishops as they are so and some to them and all other of the Clergy We read of three Archbishopricks in England before the Saxons came amongst us viz. that of London York and Carleon upon Vske But Christianity being thence expelled by the Pagans the succession of those Sees ceased till it pleased God to restore the Light of his Gospel to the blind Saxons which in this Kingdom had planted themselves by the Ministration of St. Augustin who first preached Salvation to them at Canterbury and was there buried for whose sake they removed the Episcopal See from London unto Canterbury and in process of time placed another Archbishop at ●ork which two Provinces included England and Wales and have Five and twenty Bishops under them Six and twenty Deans of Cathedrals and Collegiate Churches Sixty Arch-Deacons Five hundred forty four Prebendaries many rural Deans and about Ten thousand Rectors and Vicars of Parishes The Archbishop of Canterbury was anciently the Metropolitan of England Scotland Ireland and the Isles adjacent and was therefore sometime styled a Patriarch and had several Archbishops under him His style was Alterius orbis Papa orbis Britannici Pontifex The Date of Records in Ecclesiastical Affairs ran thus Anno Pontificatus nostri primo c. He was Legatus Natus which power was annexed to that See near One thousand years ago whereby no other Legat or Nuntio from Rome could exercise any Legantive power without the King 's special Licence In General Councils he had place before all other Archbishops at the Pope's right Foot Nor was he respected less at home than abroad being according to the practise of most other Christian States reputed the second person in the Kingdom and named and ranked before the Princes of the Blood By the favour of our present King he still enjoys divers considerable preheminences as Primate and Metropolitan of all England hath power to summon the Arch-bishop of York and the Bishops of his Province to a National Synod is primus par Regni preceding not only Dukes but all the Great Officers of the Crown next to the Royal Family He is styled by the King Dei Gratia Archiopiscopus Cantuarii Writes himself Divina Providentia as doth the Archbishop of York other Bishops write Divina permissione and hath the Title of Grace given him as it is to Dukes and Most Reverend Father in God His Office is to Crown the King and wheresoever the Court shall happen to be 't is said the King and Queen are Speciales Domestici Parochiani Domini Archiepisc. Cant. The Bishop of London is accounted his Provincial Dean the Bishop of Winchester his Chancellor and the Bishop of Rochester his Chaplain He hath the power of all the probate of Wills and granting Letters of Administration where the party hath bona notabilia that is Five pounds worth or above out of the Diocess wherein he dieth or Ten pounds worth within the Diocess of London By Statute of Hen. 8. 25. he hath power to grant Licences Dispensations c. and holds divers Courts of Judicature viz. his Courts of Arches of Audience his Prerogative Court and his Court of Peculiars And he may retain and qualifie eight Chaplains which is more by two than a Duke can do The Arch-bishop of York was also Legatus Natus and had that Authority annexed to his See He had all the Bishopricks of Scotland under his Province till the year 1470. He hath the place and precedency of all Dukes not of the Royal Blood and of all great Officers except only the Lord Chancellor or Lord Keeper

extraordinary great He only hath the patronage of all Bishopricks none can be chosen but by his Conge d'Es●ire whom he hath first nominated none can be consecrated Bishop or take possession of the Revenues of the Bishoprick without the King 's special Writ or Assent He is Guardian or Nursing Father of the Church which our Kings of England did so reckon amongst their principal Cares as in the Three and twentieth year of King Edward the First it was alledged in a pleading and allowed The King hath power to call a National or Provincial Synod and with the advice and consent thereof to make Canons Orders Ordinances and Cons●itutions to introduce into the Church what Ceremonies he shall think sit to re●orm and correct all Heresies Schisms and p●nish Contempts c The King hath power not only to unite consolidate separate inlarge or contract the limits of any old Bishoprick or other Ecclesiastical Benefice But also by his Letters Patents may erect new Bishopricks as Henry the Eighth did Six at one time and the late King Charles the Martyr intended to do at St. Albans for the Honour of the first Martyr of England and for the contracting the too large extent of the Bishoprick of Lincoln In the 28. of Eliz. when the House of Commons would have passed Bills touching Bishops granting Faculties conferring Holy Orders Ecclesiastical Censures the Oath Ex Officio Non-Residency c. The Queen being much incensed forbade them to meddle in any Ecclesiastical Affairs for that it belonged to her prerogative His Majesty hath also power of Coynage of Money of pardoning all Criminals of dispensing with all Statutes made by him or his Predecessors which are Malum prohibitum and not Malum in se. The diversity between these terms is set down in the Statute made Term. Mich. Anno 11 H. 7. 11. Thus where the Statute doth prohibit a man to coyn Money if he do he shall be hanged this is Malum prohibitum for before the said Statute it was lawful but not after and for this Evil the King may dispense But Malum in se neither the King nor any other can dispense with As if the King would give leave to rob on the High-ways c. this is void yet after the Fact done the King may pardon it So it is in Ecclesiastical Laws for conformity to the Liturgy c. which are Malum prohibitum and the King may by his Prerogative Royal as well dispense with all those penal Statutes as with Merchants to transport Silver Wooll and other prohibited Commodities by Act of Parliament The King cannot devest himself or his Successors of any part of his Royal Power Prerogative and Authority inherent and annext to the Crown nor bar his Heir of the Succession no not by Act of Parliament for such an Act is void by Law These Prerogatives do of right belong to the Crown of England which I have collected out of the most Authentick Modern Authors And to compleat this Chapter I shall proceed to his Superiority and Precedency The King of England acknowledgeth no Superior but God alone not the Emperor Omnem potestatem Rex Angliae in Regno suo quam Imperator vendicat in Imperio yet he giveth Precedency to the Emperor Eo quod antiquitate Imperium omnia regna superare creditur Touching our King's Supremacy before any other these Reasons are offered First Lucius King of this Land was the first Christian King in the World as also Constantine our Country-man the first Emperor that publickly planted Christianity Secondly The King of England is anoynted as no other King is but France Sicily and Ierusalem Thirdly He is crowned which honour the Kings of Spain Portugal Navarr and divers other Princes have not The honour of Precedency amongst Christian Kings is often disputed by their Ambassadors and Commissioners representative at General Councils Diets publick Treaties and other Honourable Assemblies at Coronations Congratulations in Foreign Countries c. which by the best Information I can get is thus stated As to England next to the Imperial Ministers the French take place as being the largest Realm in Christendom and most Noble since Charles le mayne their King obtained the Imperial Diadem the second place in the Western Empire was undisputably the right of our English Kings so enjoyed for hundreds of years 'till Spain grown rich and proud by the addition of the Indies claimed the priority yet could not gain it till their Charles the Fifth was Elected Emperor but after his Resignation the Controversie renewed upon the Treaty of Peace between Queen Elizabeth and Philip the Third King of Spain at ●oloign in France Anno 1600. Our Ambassadors were Sir Henry Nevil Iohn Harbert and Thomas Edmonds Esquires and for Spain Balthazer de Coniga Ferdinando Carillo Io. Ricardett and Lewis Varreyken The English challenged precedency as due to them before the Emperor Charles his time as doth appear by Volatteram in the time of our Henry the Seventh when the like difference being in question 't was joyntly referred to the Pope who adjudged to England the most Honourable place But the Spaniards refusing to stand to that old Award or to admit of an equality the Treaty of Peace broke up neither hath any certain Resolution been hitherto taken in the matter as ever I heard of OF THE PRINCE CHAP. III. THE King 's Eldest Son and Heir apparent from the Day of his Birth is entituled Prince of the Latin word quasi Principalis post Regem The first that we read of in England was Edward eldest Son to King Henry the Third since which time the eldest Son of the King hath been by Patent and other Ceremonies created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester and Flint By Patent also Edward the Third in the Eleventh year of his Reign added the Dukedom of Cornwal to the Principality of Wales and Anno Regni 36. he makes his eldest Son Edward the Black Prince Prince of Aquitain for which he did Fealty and Homage at Westminster Sed tamen Principatum Walliae Ducatum Cornubiae Comitatum Cestriae Cantii non reliquit Walsing fol. 172. Since the Union of England and Scotland his Title hath been Magnae Britanniae Princeps but ordinarily Prince of Wales As eldest Son to the King of Scotland he is Duke of Rothsay and Seneschal of Scotland from his Birth And so long as Normandy remained in the possession of the English he had always the style of Duke of Normandy At his Creation he is presented before the King in Princely Robes who putteth a Coronet upon his Head a Ring on his middle Finger a Verge of Gold in his Hand and his Letters Patents after they are rea● His Mantle which he wears in ●arliament is once more doubled upon the sho●●●●rs than a Dukes his Cap of State indente●●nd his Coronet formerly of Crosses and Flower de lis mixed But since the happy Restauration of his Majesty it was solemnly ordered that the Son and Heir apparent

disinherited imprisoned and murthered by their cruel Uncle the Duke of Glocester who being both a Tyrant and Usurper was justly encountred by King Henry the Seventh in the Field So infallible is the Law of Justice in revenging Cruelties and Injuries not always observing the present time wherein they are done but often calling them into reckoning when the Offenders retain least memory of them But as the saying is Ex malis moribus bonae leges oriuntur so their Tragical and Miserable Combustions have occasioned that the Law hath established more certain Resolutions in all these cases and pretences against the right Heir to the Crown than before For first though a common Opinion was conceived that a Conqueror might freely dispose of the Succession of that Estate which he had obtained by the purchase of his Sword which was the Title pretended for William Rufus yet now in our Books this difference is taken for Law viz. between the Conquest of a Kingdom from a Christian King and the Conquest of a Kingdom from an Infidel For if a King come to a Christian Kingdom by Conquest seeing he hath Vitae necis potestatem he may at his pleasure alter and change the Laws of that Kingdom but until he doth make an alteration thereof the ancient Laws do stand and therefore the case of Rufus the ancient Law of this Realm being That the eldest Son should inherit and that a King in possession cannot devise the same by his last Will or by other Act therefore the said William Rufus was no other than a Usurper But if a Christian King should Conquer a Kingdom from an Infidel and being then under his subjection there ipso facto the Laws of the Infidels are abrogated for that they be not only against Christianity but against the Law of God and Nature mentioned in the Decalogue and in that case until certain Laws be established amongst them the King by himself and such Judges as he shall appoint shall judge them and their causes according to natural Equity in such sort as Kings in ancient times did within their Kingdoms before any certain municipal Laws were given And if a King have a Kingdom by Title of Descent there seeing by the Laws of that Kingdom he doth inherit the Kingdom he cannot change those Laws of himself without consent of Parliament Also if a King have a Christian Kingdom by Conquest as King Henry the Second had Ireland after that King Iohn had given unto them being under his Obedience and Subjection the Laws of England for the Government of that Country no succeeding King could alter the same without Parliament In Succession of Kings a question hath been Whether the King who hath had Sons both before and after he came to the Crown which of them should succeed he that was born before as having the prerogative of his Birthright or he that was born after And for each Reasons and Examples have not been wanting For Xerxes the Son of Darius King of Persia being the eldest Son after the enthroning his Father carried away the Empire from his Brother Arthemones or Artobazanes who was born before his Father came to the Royal Possession thereof So Arceses the Son of another Darius born in the time of his Fathers Empire carried away the Garland from his Brother Cyrus born before his Father came to the Empire So Lewis Duke of Millain born after his Father was Duke was preferred to the Dukedom before his Brother Galiasius born before the Dukedom But notwithstanding these Examples and the Opinion of sundry Doctors to the contrary common use of Succession in these latter days hath been to the contrary and that not without good reason for that it is not meet that any that hath right to any Succession by the prerogative of their Birthright such as all elder Brothers have should be put by the same And this was the pretence of Henry the First against Robert his eldest Brother Also sundry Contentions have risen in Kingdoms between the Issue of the eldest Son of the King dying before his Father and the second Brother surviving who should Reign after the death of the Father the Nephew challenging the same unto him by the Title of his Fathers Birthright and by way of Representation Cok. part 3. cap. 4. the other claiming as eldest Son to his Father at the time of his death Upon which Title in old time there grew a Controversie between Arcus the Son of Arrotatus eldest Son of Cleomenes King of Lacedemonia and Cleomenes second Son of Cleomenes Uncle to the said Arcus But upon debate of the matter the Senate gave their Sentence for Arcus against Cleomenes Besides Enominus King of Lacedemon having two Sons Polydectes and Licurgius Poyldectes dying without Children Licurgius succeeded in the Kingdom but after he had understood that Polydectes Widow had a Child he yielded the Crown to him wherein he dealt far more religiously than either did King Iohn or King Richard the Third For King Iohn upon the like pretence not only put by Arthur Plantaginet his eldest Brother's Son from the Succession of the Kingdom but also most unnaturally took away his life And King Richard the Third to come to the Crown did most barbarously not only slay his two innocent Nephews but also defamed his Mother in publishing to the World that the late King his Brother was a Bastard Our Stories do obscurely note that Controversie of like matter had like to have grown between King Richard the Second and Iohn of Gaunt his Uncle and that he had procured the Counsel fo sundry great Learned Men to this purpose but that he found the hearts of divers Noblemen of this Kingdom and especially the Citizens of London to be against him whereupon he desisted from his intended purpose and acknowledged his Nephews Right And the reason of the Common Law of England is notable in this point and may be collected out of the ancient Authors of the same Glanvile lib. 7. cap. 1. Bracton lib. 7. c. 30. and by Brittan fol. 119. For they say Whosoever is Heir to another aut est haeres jure proprietatis as the eldest Son shall inherit only before his Brothers aut jure representationis as where the eldest Son dieth in the life of his Father his Issue shall inherit before the youngest Son for though the youngest sit magis propinquus yet jure representationis the Issue of the eldest Son shall inherit for that he doth represent the person of his Father And as Bracton saith jus proprietatis which his Father had by his Birthright doth descend unto him aut jure propinquitatis ut propinqui jus excludit remotum remotus remotiorem aut jure sanguinis And yet Glanvile Lord Chief Justice under King Henry the Second seemeth to make this questionable here in England Who should be preferred the Uncle or the Nephew Also it hath been resolved for Law That the possession of the Crown purgeth all defects